Under which circumstance can deadly force be justified against an unarmed suspect who is fleeing?

The justification for using deadly force against an unarmed suspect who is fleeing is rooted in the immediate threat that the suspect poses to the safety of others. The correct answer emphasizes that deadly force is justified only when the fleeing individual presents a significant threat of death or serious injury to others, regardless of whether they are armed or what crime they may have committed.

Law enforcement protocols often stipulate that the use of deadly force should be a last resort, reserved for situations in which there is an imminent threat to life. This principle protects not only the rights of suspects but also ensures the safety of the community. In scenarios where a suspect is fleeing but does not pose a significant threat, the use of lethal force could lead to unnecessary loss of life and potential legal ramifications for the officers involved.

In contrast, circumstances where theft has occurred, where the suspect is merely unarmed, or where a violent crime has been committed outside the context of an immediate threat do not meet the legal standards for justifiable use of deadly force. Each of these contexts fails to address the critical factor of whether an imminent threat to life exists, which is why they are not correct answers.